How Difficult Is It To Sneak Past A City Guard?

by Wimwick (Neil Ellis) on August 27, 2010

Assigning difficulty checks (DCs) for skill challenges can be a frustrating experience. Some checks have set DCs that are provided for the DM. Examples of this are traps and locks that have a predetermined level of difficulty. A skill check that doesn’t have such an obvious DC is Stealth for sneaking past a guard. Why is this check less obvious? Because it’s opposed by the guards passive Perception. The tougher the guard, the higher his Perception.

This raises some mechanical questions that DMs needs to answer. First, is it necessary to create a guard for the skill challenge? If it’s needed, what level should the guard be? If the PCs are in the paragon tier should the guard also be paragon? Does that even make sense? If the PCs fail the check and the guard notices the PC, what is the guard’s response? Will he attack, call for backup or runaway? Suddenly, we have a lot of extra contingencies that need to be planned for but we haven’t answered the original question. What is the guards passive Perception and just how difficult is it to sneak past him?

I am of the opinion that the less mechanics required the better. In other words, don’t role up a city guard for this encounter. Fortunately, the DMG provides set DCs that scale based on the characters level. Of course this also raises an additional question. Depending on the level of the PCs is this skill check even necessary?

Let me explain. At first level, a skill challenge where the party sneaks past the guard is tense and filled with drama. The guard is every bit as tough, perhaps tougher, than the PCs. This continues to be true throughout the heroic tier. However, once the PCs hit paragon and beyond sneaking past a common guard looses its luster. The drama and excitement of this type of challenge is gone. The party has been there done that. So before you go and determine the required DC ask yourself if the check or the skill challenge is even necessary.

Now, assuming that the skill check or challenge is required and that this event is intended to be an intense moment full of drama and action, a DC for the check is required. If you have no intention of having the PCs fight the guard, then you have no reason to create a NPC for this situation. What you need to do is decide on what a reasonable DC would be for the situation. This requires that you ask some questions about the guard.

How switched on is the guard? How well does he know his patrol route? Was he drinking before his shift? All of these questions are role-playing questions that the DM can decide. If the guard is switched on and a capable veteran it’s a hard check. If he’s a new recruit who is fairly nervous things won’t be so difficult for the PC.

Adding some role-playing flavour into this scenario will make it more enjoyable for your PCs. If they realize that the guard is older and wears his armour with ease, the PCs might surmise that this is guard is a veteran. Similarly if the guard is constantly fussing with the straps and buckles on his armour the PCs might be led to believe he is a new recruit.

How do the PCs determine the guard’s alertness level? Perception checks, of course. Which is another variable while putting together DCs for this skill challenge. Usually the higher the PC rolls the more information they can learn.

Of course the DM should also know why the door is being guarded. Designing a 10 x 10 room with a guard in it is not wise encounter design and neither is placing a guard in front of a door just because you want the PCs to sneak past. The encounter and therefore this skill check requires meaning. If that can’t be provided then it should be removed. If the PCs are level 15 and this is a town guard of a settlement with less than 10,000 people, why is the check required? It’s unlikely the guards would even notice the Fighter in plate armour sneaking past. The Fighter after all has had a few levels to practice being sneaky.

Is the check required because of the larger story of the campaign? Is the guard covering for a rookie who is off tonight attending a wedding? Perhaps the guards have been attacked by unknown forces recently, requiring them to be extra vigilant. The reason matters because it’s tied to the story. This makes it important to your players, so give the rational behind the check the consideration it deserves.

The real question the DM has to ask himself when designing the challenge is how difficult do I want to make this skill challenge? If the answer is very difficult, then make the DCs hard. This type of thinking takes the thinking right out of the equation. The important distinction is to know why the check is required in the first place. Now all you need to do is create the narrative that will drive the skill challenge forward. In other words, what happens after the PC sneaks past the guard?

Related

The DCs per level table is a godsend. I love using it even though it could be better. I believe it’s been expanded soon to include new Easy/Moderate/Hard numbers for Essentials. See my post on this.

I abuse the DC table mercilessly. Unless I have an NPC statted out (and often even then) I don’t roll for their opposed checks. Instead I decide whether I think the situation is Easy, Moderate, or Hard (usually at their level, but sometimes higher) and have the PCs roll against a set DC. Same for things that don’t have skills. If they encounter a lock, the DC for opening will be what

You make a good point about what makes an appropriate challenge at different levels. In the paragon level game I’m running, I thought about putting in a scene in which the PCs dealt with the crime syndicate of a town in the world. I had some fun ideas for it, but then it hit me: the party is level 11. Conceptually (since the characters hadn’t actually gone through the Heroic tier) they’ve already dealt with the petty crime bosses the world has to offer. They’re not going to fear extortion or whatever else from these people, and the criminals, if they’re informed at all, are not going to mess with the party. So I didn’t bother. If I’d wanted to make them feel cool, I might have mentioned the crime syndicate in passing, and how the party is given a wide berth.

But, soon, the PCs will go on travels beyond the world. A criminal faction in the Feywild will not be something handled lightly. The DCs for dealing with them will be at or above the party’s level, because it’s a whole new ball game, new levels of stealth and intrigue – even if it boils down to much the same thing. I could make up some really rough group in the world, too, but the point is that the challenges don’t just track with the party’s level. They fight goblin bandits at first level, drow slavers at 11th level, neogi pirates at 21st level, and marauding primordials at 30th level, or whatever, even though it could be essentially the same sort of hit-and-run encounter each time.

Unfortunately my experience with my player characters is that if they are allowed to succeed too much or feel “too cool”, then they perceive themselves as invincible and throw a baby fit when a dragon or high level NPC defeats them. I never had this problem before 4e. I think it maybe has to do with the unbelievable amount of HP and healing surges. As a DM it gets frustrating to run encounters for players who are your friends but that you have accidentally spoiled in this way. They shouldn’t always win no matter what. If they roll poorly they should have consequences without wining and calling ME unfair. So Normally no matter what they “plan” when I run campaigns I try to throw as large of a wrench in it as possible. This avoids creating a group of prima donnas and seems to be true to real life. My plans NEVER work haha ….
Point – feeling super human is great but it has its disadvantages when a DM is trying to run suspenseful and lasting encounters when characters don’t see any threat regardless of the monster level.